click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36
at the whole statement of his, and to use that as an excuse for this bill -- by the way, at 97% of small businesses have in come under $250,000. so to use that once again as the rationale is i think ignorant of the fact. let me just say a word about the provisions on earned income tax and the child tax credits. you can play around with language, whether it is a tax or spending, but the truth of the matter is that the bill that was filed last night would raise taxes on 25 million working families. >> i just cannot believe that. this is the joint committee on taxation that says the provisions are spent. these are spending provisions, not tax provisions. this is not a tax increase. i will just then by the joint committee on tax reform. >> i have enjoyed the discussion to between the chairman and ranking member. is it a fact that when you make these tax cuts permanent for people making a million dollars or more, then you are at the same time, 9099000 for example, you are giving that person of $50,000 tax cut. >> about understood correctly what your asking, we are si on in, over 1 million, bu
with a bipartisan vote. what other spending cuts would you propose? what has gotten us into this mess is people propose large numbers and never fell in the details. we have filled in the details of our first step. let them kill and the details of their first step on it attacks or the spending side. they have not done either so it is not much of an offer. >> what they did say, they did not include having the top two rates on the wealthiest americans which means their proposal, their $800 million goes right back to the middle class. it would have to the mortgage tax deductions, college deductions, charitable deductions, mortgage relief legislation that i have had in place to you don't have to pay taxes on a short sale. there is a whole range of things that you have to go to better back on the middle class. we're not going to do that. we've got to make sure that the wealthiest in this country help pay down this large deficit. >> will the democrats just wait? >> we have a lot of discussions going on in the senate and the various places. we know what the parameters are and the speaker knows what the
. it is a very complicated issue. it is very complex. it is something that many of us have been fighting in the particulars of this, and some in their personal lives, as well as official lives. this is a very high priority for us. because of it -- money. let's just take money out there on the side on those that would be opposed to gun safety. i did not heed hunters with the same brush. i think the assault weapon gives hunters a bad name, and that is undeserved. many of them think it should be banned. that is why i am so glad my consummate is taking the lead to make that distinction. the fact is that there was no prospects of success for the members to be here to continue to make the fight so when there was a prospect of the feds -- a prospect of success, but they would be here. the other then be cleared out by the nra on a boat that was not afford to come to call. >> one of my jobs as the democrat is chief deputy. we had to vote to pass sensible gun legislation through the house, but when the senate said they could not live with 60 votes, the leader made the decision that this really was
of representatives from another party creates an opportunity for us. we know that if my party have won everything, it would have been tough for us because the political attacks would have taken place from the other side of the aisle to take on entitlements reform. now that we have a president of one party in the house of representatives of another party, i believe we can tackle this issue. that is really what we desire. it is the right thing to do. we are in the midst of tough negotiations taking place between two people -- the president of the united states, barack obama, and the speaker of the house, john data. i want to express my appreciation -- and the speaker of the house, john boehner. i want to express my appreciation to my colleagues. i have served in the minority. it is challenging. it is not easy. we are 11 days away from going over the fiscal cliff. we feel strongly about the need of this institution to state its position on this. we heard the majority leader in the united states senate indicate that he does not want to bring up this measure if it passes the house of representatives.
at the history of what has been done. there is a long history of using that debt limit as a moment to distract from the party in power. if we had an academic seminar on the impact of the that struggle and the fiscal policy, he would say that it was a negative thing. >> well, i have never until last year of august 2011, i have not seen any serious effort or serious threat made by the leadership of congress to refuse to give the secretary of treasury the ability to offer to meet obligations congress had adopted. i thought that was a new experience for us. it certainly was for me to see that happen. dr. zandi, you said you think that we need to repeal this law that tries to set a debt limit and concentrate more on taxing and spending policies that causes to raise the debt, as i understand? >> absolutely. it is a bad way to conduct policy. it is a problem. look at july and august of 2011. it was a mess. gdp downgraded the debt. it really had an impact. cbo is estimating the interest costs is costing us money. it is pretty clear that this is not going to get any better going forward. it will be wor
behind for our children and grandchildren that our parents left behind for us until you make the entitlement programs meet the demographics of our country. we have known that for years. when are we ever going to make those kind of decisions? we will have another opportunity later, when the debt ceiling issue arrives. when are we going to make this decision? that is our question. this whole discussion -- and admittedly, the president has some advantages, being one messenger. you would think this whole discussion was about nothing other than raising the top two has tax rates. -- two tax rates. that has literally nothing to do with solving the problem. i have been waiting for the president to become serious about solving the problem. i do not know when he is going to become serious. it sounds to me like we are running out of time. we will take our cues from the speaker as to when they are able, if they are able, to reach some kind of agreement. >> the democrats have 50 or more votes. a great step in itself. what are the indications for republicans to approach for the debt to not
be spending that money. let us get on with building a business. society should do it. people should take that as a given. i know the rest of us have it. we would gladly get rid of all of that in a minute. it is a health care issue. we talked about technology and data sharing. there are productivity, issues that are significant. >> i want to touch on some other hot-button topics we have not discussed as much. capital gains, dividends. current laws, they go back up. dividends treated as ordinary income. capital gains goes back up to 20%. how much revenue are we talking about? if those become bargaining chips, how much are we giving up? >> under current law, the capital gains rate is scheduled to go to 20%. we are actually talking 23.8%. dividends are scheduled to go to ordinary rates. you need the 3.8% for people who have higher incomes. significant increases in both are scheduled. as you think about the fiscal cliff and what is coming, one of the few places you can see people responding to it is in their behavior around capital gains and dividends. companies are moving up to how, sharehol
. the delay in the spending cuts whatsoever. do you think the president's current offer gives us the 2-1 test? >> no. it is short. he needs to come up with roughly $600 billion more in spending cuts over the next 10 years. i think that there are significant reforms in medicare, medicaid, agricultural subsidies, and other programs in the budget. those are difficult things to implement. it takes a lot of guts to propose those things. i would not discount them. they are important. to answer your question more specifically, we do name or spending cuts to get to my ideal. -- we need more spending cuts to get to my ideal. >> policymakers need to reform entitlements. i do see members of the other party -- most notably, mr. hoyer --he said, not now. they are on the table for a later discussion. i have been disappointed that a lot of the discussion seems to be on the revenue side and not really on the cutting side. really quickly, the debt ceiling. there is something about your testimony that caught my attention, which is your support for the initiative offered by senator rob portman. lawmakers can ad
of us who had the privilege to serve with you. i hope and i pray that god will give you and your wife many, many more years of life and enjoyment because you have certainly earned it, because you have served not only the united states house of representatives, but you have served us, you have served the people of our districts as well as helping us be better members of congress. so with that i will close by asking god to please bless you and your family and may god continue to bless the house of representatives and jay pearson, you will be in our hearts until the day we die. god bless you. . mr. woodall: at this time, it's migrate pleasure to yield the gentleman from california, chairman of the ways and means health subcommittee, mr. herger. mr. herger: i thank my good friend. how wonderful it is to be able to sit here and listen to all these incredibly warm remarks from people who, like myself, know and love jay pearson. and there's a reason for that. jay, you're one of the best of the best. and i think, it's hard to believe that 26 years comes and goes so very, very quickly, but it
massachusetts. mr. markey: and if barney frank was down here, none of us would have -- none of this would have happened in terms of the understanding of the parliamentary procedure. he was up there trying to grab an managenary microphone. . john oliver has been for us -- olver, has been for us an invaluable colleague. he taught so much to us. when he sat down with us talking about transportation, he explained our own districts to us as far as what was possible. on climate change, i talked to him for about 20 years. he was on this issue in the early 1990's and probably understood it probably even before that. he is that smart. he is that visionary in terms of the issues are essential not just to massachusetts, but to our planet. and it has been migrate honor to have served with you, john and to have called you my friend and colleague overall of these years and we thank you so much for what you have done for us and for the country and thank you. and with that -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from
campaign. george burns used to joke that all you need to succeed in show business is sincerity. and if you can fake that, you got it made. [laughter] i think genuine authenticity is important, especially in a presidential candidacy. and barack obama is very authentic. that undergirded us in many ways, and even in this campaign. people felt comfortable with who he was. they were not going to be surprised by him. they knew what drove him. and they felt comfortable. >> another question from this side. >> after a the citizens united supreme court decision, there was a lot of worry about the effect this would have on campaigns, especially with the effect of super donors giving millions and millions of dollars to one campaign. i was wondering to what extent did super pacs affect both sides? are those fears -- how founded are they? how much have they come to light? i am wondering about your views in general. >> the thing to be hopeful about is that a billion dollars or so were spent and then a billion more on the wrong side. and we were able to win. hundreds of millions of dollars were spent agai
is retiring fr the senate aft 12 yea he spoke to us about why he thinks compromise in the senate is not a four-letter word. this is 40 minutes. >> thank you for spending a half-hour with us to talk about your 12 years in washington. it ended with the reelection of barack obama. if you could think of adjectives, what would they be to describe these seven years? >> interesting. challenging. sometimes totally frustrating. full of opportunities for the country. there were good times during these 12 years, laced together with some that were not so good. 9/11. the anthrax scare. there were also positive things. the election of barack obama i thought was a very positive statement for the country and moving forward in a way out of a fiscal of this. abyss.thi i could not have imagined a better time to have been here with all of the things that have happened. >> let me ask you to look back over those 12 years and ask what the high point was. >> when we could work together. maybe the single event that would and body that is the gang of 14. john mccain and i put together six other democrats and six other
that received 53 democratic votes in the u.s. senate only two years ago and the spending reduction saket serious start toward reducing our deficit and protecting our national security. abs president a balanced offer from the president this is our best option and senate democrats should take up both of these measures immediately. the president has a choice mr. speaker, he can support these measures or be responsible for reckless spending and the largest tax hike in american history. and i yield back. >> thank you mr. speaker, what is unbalance sd the republican package that we see on the floor today. we already talked about the numbers of the republican plan b tax proposal which compared to going over the fiscal cliff and the senate alternative would actually provide millionaires with a $50,000 tax cut on average while 25 million american families will actually see a tax increase of $1,000 on average, including, mr. speaker, some of our soldiers on the front line in afghanistan today. and majority leader talked about doing the math. do the math on the tax plan because that's exactly what it shows
the popularity issue is a significant one. i would not ever confuse it with how people feel about us. it is a very different thing. >> in many places, we want friends. i have a three-part question -- what can we do to encourage a resolution or force a resolution to end the conflict? how likely is it we can do this successfully? what are the continued benefits of we succeed? >> i will ask bruce to begin. >> the israeli-palestinian conflict is extraordinarily difficult to sell. i have spent an inordinate amount of my life with israelis and palestinians trying to reason together and cannot claim any measure of success. that said, i think where we are today is substantially different than where we have been in the past. we know the contours' of agreement between israel and palestine. president clinton laid them out 12 years ago. there has been a lot of work since then. the question then becomes, what are we prepared to do to make that happen? that is a question of political will. there are huge obstacles on both sides. the forces of peace in the israeli camp and the palestinian camp have
. they are professionals and patriots. they serve in places where there is little or no u.s. presence. i trust them with my life. it is important to recognize that our colleagues and across the department at home and abroad get it right list times for years on end on some of the top the circumstances imaginable. he cannot lose sight of that. -- we cannot lose sight of that. we have to do better. be open to our colleagues who lost their lives in benghazi. -- we owe it to our colleagues who lost their lives in benghazi. thousands of our colleagues are serving america in diplomatic posts around the world. we will never forget every act of terrorism and we'll never stop working to make things better and safer. the united states will keep leading and engaging around the world, including in those hard places where america's interests -- thank you very much. >> mr. chairman, senator lugar, members of the committee, i also want to thank you for this opportunity. all of us have a responsibility to provide the men and women who have served this country with the best possible security and support. the supervisors hav
. [laughter] two of us so far. i will see you at the reunion dinner. [applause] [laughter] i am sure the press will not read too much into that one. [laughter] i want to thank you all for your kind hospitality. i want to thank you, jimmy, for holding this event. wherever i went, people would say, i work for jack kemp. that legacy lives on some much because of the connection to the family. there was something this legacy .as such reach hi it is an honor to be a part of this an. jack kemp was my mentor. knowing jack kemp was one of the greatest experiences of my life. i was lucky to work with him. i do not know if bill is here. he has to wake up really early in the morning to do his radio show. he and i served in the house of representatives. we had our top hits. -- tough hits. we share something in common. we both used to be the next vice president of the united states. [applause] though i wish this election turned out a little differently, i am proud of a campaign has mitt romney and i ran. he would have been a great president. it would have been an honor to serve at his side. we gave this rac
to thank all seven witnesses for bearing with us. my question is over a concern that i have in regard to the exchanges and the authority of the secretary in regard to will making. i am going to direct my questioning to the secretary of health services in wisconsin, mr. dennis smith, and hopefully we will be able to get all this done in five minutes. the recently released information regarding health care quality for exchanges on november the 27, it specifically mentions a section, 1311 of aca, which directs quality health plan issues and improvement strategies as directed by the secretary, specifically subsection 8 of 1311 would allow the secretary to prevent physicians treating patients in exchanges unless they implement such mechanisms to improve health care quality the secretary may require. physicians must follow quality directives as defined by the secretary or lose their business. mr. smith, are you aware of this provision? >> i am not familiar with that section. >> let me ask you this. in this provision, you may not know this either, but the word quality is not defined in the s
independence. i will never forget the late senator robert sitting in an office with us all together, sobbing, saying, we saved the senate. we came to an agreement that we were going to vote to give a judicial appointees and up or down vote, rather than having to go to a filibuster. it was very difficult to get 60 votes. it was difficult at times to get 60 votes to tell what day it was or whether it was day or night. we proved we could work together. that did not work in perpetuity. for that period of time, there was a willingness to cooperate and work together, the likes of which we have not seen since. >> harry reid has announced an interest in changing filibuster rules. do you support a change? >> we have to do something. it is a process -- people think of a filibuster in "mr. smith goes to washington." i think we should have those rules in place to change it so mr. smith stays on the floor during the filibuster. it does not just run time against the senate. it does not make any sense. if somebody feels strongly enough that they want to bring the senate to a halt, they should be willing to
and the revenue would be used because it will be more effective in collecting it. every one of those states, the revenues have gone down, the income tax has gone up, and the size of government has gone up. from my standpoint, a value- added tax is just a way to grossly expand the size of the government, and it does not fix our revenue problems. more importantly than that, just the point where i think this argument ends up, the american people would annihilate any party that passed a national sales tax rate. if the democratic party thinks they are in charge now, and they are, and the republican party has done some things to marginalize itself, but if you want to resurrect a republican party, give me a value-added tax. >> let's take the value-added tax off the table for this the session, and i want to turn to donald marron and bring it back to the reality we are today and get your numbers perspective. speaker boehner offered up to the president $800 billion in revenue, all through closing loopholes dealing with deductions, no increase in rates. first of all, on the basic math, can you get to
a factory in china and sell cars. they can delay paying u.s. taxes on that indefinitely. but the money comes from the rent, as so-called passive income, they have to pay taxes on that immediately. this provision says if your a bank -- you can be late paying your taxes. it is going to be considered active income. it is quite valuable to them. it is kind of a gray area. in 1986 when they did big tax reform, they said that is active income and we should tax that money. host: we have been talking with sam goldfarb from cq roll call. thank you very much. >> explores the history and literary culture of all money -- of albany. tonight on c-span, a senate debate on the fiscal cliff. shaun donovan discusses it. harry reid and mitch mcconnell when back-and-forth on fiscal cliff issues and a proposal to raise the debt ceiling. here is part of their exchange. >> yesterday afternoon, i came to the floor and offered president obama's proposal on the fiscal cliff to show that neither he nor democrats in congress are acting in good faith in these negotiations. with just a few weeks ago before a potentially
the comptroller general of the united states. he was also the head director of the u.s. government accountability office for almost 10 years. he is widely read and has written numerous articles on the debt and deficit. he has a new initiative which makes tremendous sense. his new group is looking at the efficiencies, inefficiencies, duplications in the government to try to find areas where we can save money without cutting. it is a very interesting initiative, one that you ought to look into and see about supporting. i hope we he will mention it briefly in his comments today. i will turn to the panel and sit-down and we will start discussing hopefully some of these issues. [inaudible] >> the short run problems of the fiscal cliff, but we're going to do with this debt and deficit issue and take time to summarize how we should look at these issues. i will start with david on the far side and move right across. >> thank you for coming. first, there are common denominators between the challenges at the federal, state, and local levels. some are inadequate but the controls, escalating health care cost
about sitting across from you is that, for all of us who have been part of the institute's staff, we are wondering what you been thinking, with this experience has been like for you over the last year-and-a-half, two years. so tonight, we get to hear for the first time your reaction to the campaign. >> thank you very much. i want to thank the in boyer for the support the university has given the institute politics, including making it possible for us to hire such extraordinary people like steve edwards and been restored and all of the other people -- and ben reeseberg and all the other people. [applause] you have been wondering what i have been doing and i have been wondering what you have been doing. [laughter] >> those who were disappointed by this outcome, the democrats elated by this outcome -- given the conventional wisdom around this campaign, the president's approval ratings that were barely above 50%, often dipping below it, the unemployment around 8%, gdp growth stock of around 2% -- the conventional wisdom was that should -- that this president should not be reelected. as y
-bowles committee and focused specifically on social security and medicare. she's joining us tonight with an extraordinary background and information on this. january, let's talk for a few minutes about your experiences and what you think we can do. ms. schakowsky: thank you, congressman garamendi for leading this hour where hopefully we can get the facts out about medicare and social security. and i want to concentrate on medicare. first of all, i want to ask this fundamental question, do we really think that the united states of america is poorer today than we were seven years ago when social security -- 70 years ago when social security came into being. that the united states is really poorer than 50 years ago when medicare and medicaid came into being? the answer is simply no. the economy has grown 15 times over since social security was enacted and it was enacted because this country decided that it was really important for us to not have poor houses for our elderly in this country, that the medicare and medicaid came in that insurance companies really didn't want to ensure old
that is used. we have to wait until they do physical harm to someone. that can lead to tragedy is that we have seen where people with mental health problems and nothing was done about it. host: we have this from twitter. ira, go ahead. caller: good morning. i had an experience yesterday while traveling. served four years in the marines. i have seen my share of violence in the military and in the streets of our country. i am in my 60's. i walk up to the place. there is a young man and a young lady there. the young man is strapped. automatic pistol on his side. without hesitation, i said, good morning, young man. what is that you have on your side? he said, it's a gun. "is it a real gun?" "why do you need to bring it into this place?" "i have a right to carry in north carolina." i did not know the state law. as i went in, i ask for a seat the manager. i said, "there is a man carrying an exposed pistol on his side and it has me uncomfortable." my wife said, "be quiet." "i cannot sit here and next to this guy." my wife got nervous. "we should just leave." "we are leaving. i am uncomfortable after
. the second deadline that comes along as february 15, next year. that is when we have asked states to tell us they want to be a denture a partnership exchange. we will know more as far as how many work with us. >> thank you for being here and congratulations on the work in maryland. we are very proud of that. i wanted to ask you in view of the fact states will be making a judgment on whether they can stand up to a state based exchange, and another basis we will be looking at the partnership model, you spoke with your colleagues around the country who are making these decisions. what are the kinds of it zaidi's they express to you that you are able to say, look, there is a way to do this. rather it is a certain technical thing or the process of how you get a consensus behind it and get people comfortable moving forward, what are you saying to your colleagues who may be one to get there but are worried a little bit about it based on the maryland experience, it can give them some comfort and confidence they can do this? >> thank you for your question and your leadership in maryland. there is a l
for joining us today, and thank you to deloitte for partnering with us in this event. when we launched bloomberg government just about two years ago, we had the aspiration of creating a one-stop shop, with data, tools, news, and analysis to help government affairs and government sales professionals make better and faster decisions. we went a long way toward achieving that aspiration. a big part of it is conversations on the important issues that face our nation today, particularly at the intersection of business and government. today's discussion on the fiscal cliff clearly meets that. we are honored to have such a thoughtful panel. senator mark warner, senator bob corker, congressman chris van hollen, governor tim pawlenty, who is currently president and ceo of the financial services roundtable. moderating our discussion today is al hunt. we always love having al over here. he really put bloomberg on the map here in d.c.. yesterday it was his birthday -- happy birthday, al. [applause] i'm going to turn things over to congressman tom davis -- this is a man who really needs no introduct
intact. it's shames will and we need to do more than that. the people who sent us here deserve more than that we should not be crying out in the wilderness to work, we have been sent here to work and we need to get down to it. in the final hours of this congress and we have the threat of working christmas, if we have to do it to get things done, i'm willing to do that, but the majority should help solve the nation's most pressing issue, that's why we're here. do not activelyhoose to leave the work unfinished. as we silt and wait for gos on the fissclaldeliff, the other -- there is other legislation that's ready that could be done now, could help our markets, relieve the mind of employer, could give security to the middle class and people below that and we certainly ought to be doing it. today's rule simply does the following. all we're doing now at this minute is we're giving the majority the freedom to spend the rest of this month and the rest of this year on minor, noncontroversial legislation. i refuse to give this blank check to a majority that has yet to show any interest in complet
are suffering. we ask the president, sit down with us and be serious about the specifics in the spending so we can stop the wasteful spending in washington and finally address the problem. >> as we continue to try to solve the fiscal cliff, the thing we have continued to look at is our economy. today in the whip's office we will have small family-owned businesses in there and talk about ways to protect the family business, continue to grow while at the same time make sure we solve this fiscal cliff. look, each and every day as we walk the halls, you continue to ask the questions. you want the answers to solving the fiscal cliff. we put the offer on the table and the president now has to engage. the next 72 hours are critical. if he sits back and continues to play politics, that will give you the answer of where we're going. this is the opportunity for the country to lead and opportunity for the president to lead. >> as these fiscal cliff negotiations and debate continues, i think it's important to remember that washington doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem. and under thi
the house, but i remain proud of our bipartisan effort for which the u.s.a. today called us the brave 38. and i believe this type of thoughtful independent leadership that this is the type of leadership that the 10th district deserves. i also believe that the courage and leadership shown by the house to take on the difficult, but necessary position of reining entitlement spending deserves recognition. we know that medicare stands out as a primary driver of our debt in the future. and unfortunately, this future is not so far off. with one of medicare's key programs scheduled to go bankrupt in the next 10 to 12 years, sustaining the status quo means dramatic cuts down the road on the vulnerable americans who need the program the most, crippling increases to the debt and most likely both. instead, i believe we have a generational obligation to ensure that our children's potential is not crossed by a debt burden borne out of the inability to govern responsebly. medicare reform requires broad bipartisan support so we are not there yet. we are not. i do want to express my appreciation to democ
you for joining us at this press conference. >> the obvious question that the american people were asking is, what is john bender working for. -- john john boehner waiting for it? the farmers are trying to recover from a tough crop year but john bender will not call a vote. what is john painter waiting for? -- john boehner waiting for? traditionally, we did not have a vote on this. we would not call this for pat -- passage. what is the comet -- waiting for when it comes to post a reformed? hal blog the delete soon for that bill? so that we would make the postal service still retains the very best in the world. the most obvious and top local question, what is he waiting for when it comes to tax breaks for working families across america? this is the reality we face? . we sent the bill to him that will protect 98% of american families and he will not call it on the floor. is he waiting for what is going to happen january 1 when consumer confidence is shaken across america, as everyone sees an increase in income-tax rates, including working families because he will not act? is he wait
're not here to husband their popularity and admire it on the shelf. we're here to use it and get things done and make it permanent difference for the better the life of this country. for the last story, i was with him the day before osama bin laden was killed. i didn't know. by now, i was out of the white house. so i went back there to help on jokes. and we had lunch. at the lunch, he had just been down to alabama where they had a terrible storm and he was telling me stories of those he met down there and finding get the difference at cape canaveral. it was after she had been shot. he never imagined that she would recover from that at all. and it was just a normal conversation. then the speech writers came in and we went through the jokes. we got to play jokes -- poor tim pawlenty. annie says let's take this out. osama bin laden. that is so yesterday. [laughter] let's take it out. and someone says, well, we can stick in hosni who was still in power. and obama says, yes, let's do that. and that is not funny at all. but he is the president. [laughter] the next night, my wife susan was sitting
of the aisle, very good friends. as far as working things out is not as easy as it used to be. >> what are some of the root causes? >> i think and i am not pointing fingers, when we went after jimi was the newt speaker and jim was forced out of office. they went after newt. that is one of the things that started this movement. over time, i think it has become political as well as personal. much more political and personal. >> she said raising cain, are -- you will the the gavel for the oversight committee and use that to raise the number of investigations especially of the clinton administration. what do you see as your legacy of that tenure? >> i think bill clinton, president clinton and secretary as secretary -- hilary as secretary of state do not like me very much. i was chair of the government oversight committee during the time we were investigating whitewater and we were investigating campaign contributions that came from sources outside the united states and from various people. there was an awful lot to that. we had people testifying like ohnny chonung, they had contributed money to gai
and savings would know where to go, -- with nowhere to go, too fearful to be invested in productive uses, simply because of the crisis. this is the twin peaks, have been referring to. when i say there is no debt crisis, i don't mean there is no debt. the debt is a huge problem just like a cancer patient has a problem with pain. but it isn't healthy to be -- but it is analytically unhelpful to be thinking in terms of the debt crisis. we might as well refer to the crisis we are going through as the savings crisis, a crisis caused by too much savings. you have never heard anyone from bloomberg refer to it as a crisis of a glut of money with nowhere to go, but it is, just as much as it is a crisis of debt. let's begin at the beginning. let's talk about debt. reading the mainstream outlets, newspapers, or listening to the idiotic stations like fox, hyou would think that it is possible to have capitalism without debt. recall of feudalism. -- well, it isn't. once, it was possible to have an economy with debt that is marginal. recall feudalism. what was the process that led to the accumulation o
and your enemies. hamilton and madison right the document. it is a very good document. ask any of us on the courts, we would be in agreement on the basic things. the basic framework is it creates institutions of democracy. people can decide for themselves what kinds of community they want it is a special kind of democracy. it is a democracy that protect certain basic human rights that assures some degree of equality. the separation of powers is not what you are looking for here. separation of powers -- he is very clear. you are looking for judicial independence. the separation of powers is both vertical and it is also horizontal. the basic function is not to preserve a rule of law. it is to divide power into pockets. you prevent any group of people from being too powerful. that is the basic purpose. finally, a rule of law. you have a document that is trying to restore democratic institutions, protection of human rights, a degree of equality, separating power, and guaranteeing a rule of law. hamilton is the one who brings in the court. he is trying to answer a question. we have writte
, is 5.2%-6.5%. that gives us some time. my anticipation is that the removal of accommodation after the takeoff point, wherever that occurs, would be relatively gradual. i don't think we are looking at a rapid increase. that depends on where inflation is and other conditions but the path that we are basing these numbers on is one that assumes an increase in the funds rate first occurring sometime after unemployment goes below 6.5% but does not necessarily assume a rapid increase after that. we said we would take a balanced approach. when we get to that point, we may or may not raise rates at that point. we will look at the situation. assuming inflation remains well- controlled, which i fully anticipate -- i think to rate of increase would be moderate -- the exit strategy that we put out is consistent with our statement today because the exit strategy was primarily about how we would normalize the balance sheet over time. we have not made any changes in that and we believe some increase in the size of our balance sheet is consistent with that general sequence that we laid out in the
and innovation, the moment you start doing that, like having a machine that prints money, so you want to use more faster and more intensely, producing more money. if you overreach and take too much value from the future to bring it into the present, you too. the sectors in which this dynamic annapolis process is manchin to push the boundaries of technology and create wealth -- in amsterdam and holland the with-it is always local lines. there will always be surplus riches. regis and surplus regions. southern england was in debt. now is the obvious. similarly, you have new york state in surplus, washington state inertification plus. it started in manchester, in amsterdam. it is always localized. there will always be defecit regions and surplus regions. so, manchester northern england was in surplus back then. southern england was in debt. now it is the opposite. similarly, you have new york state in surplus, washington state in surplus. illinois, the dakotas in debt. missouri is your equivalent of in greece, a permanent bailout. the thing is, whereas markets are amazing institutions for allocating
Search Results 0 to 35 of about 36